Skip to comments.Panama Papers Reveal Clinton’s Kremlin Connection
Posted on 04/08/2016 7:42:39 AM PDT by Smittie
The revelations of the so-called Panama Papers that are roiling the worlds political and financial elites this week include important facts about Team Clinton. This unprecedented trove of documents purloined from a shady Panama law firm that arranged tax havens, and perhaps money laundering, for the globes super-rich includes juicy insights into how Russias elite hides its ill-gotten wealth.
Almost lost among the many revelations is the fact that Russias biggest bank uses The Podesta Group as its lobbyist in Washington, D.C. Though hardly a household name, this firm is well known inside the Beltway, not least because its CEO is Tony Podesta, one of the best-connected Democratic machers in the country. He founded the firm in 1998 with his brother John, formerly chief of staff to President Bill Clinton, then counselor to President Barack Obama, Mr. Podesta is the very definition of a Democratic insider. Outsiders engage the Podestas and their well-connected lobbying firm to improve their image and get access to Democratic bigwigs.
Which is exactly what Sberbank, Russias biggest financial institution, did this spring. As reported at the end of March, the Podesta Group registered with the U.S. Government as a lobbyist for Sberbank, as required by law, naming three Podesta Group staffers: Tony Podesta plus Stephen Rademaker and David Adams, the last two former assistant secretaries of state. It should be noted that Tony Podesta is a big-money bundler for the Hillary Clinton presidential campaign while his brother John is the chairman of that campaign, the chief architect of her plans to take the White House this November.
(Excerpt) Read more at observer.com ...
Thats what the oregon standoff is about. Clinton is selling the land to the Ogliarchs.
Bill Clinton traveled to the USSR during the height of the Cold War.
To this day he has refused to say what he did there or who he met with.
The Clintons take money from anyone and anywhere. Both of them are walking national security risks everyday of their lives. Who knows what kind of IOU’s the Clintons owe to contributors to that phony foundation of theirs, and more worrisome is who these donors are.
There might be a revolution before the election.
I’ll settle for a revelation that details Hillary’s pay-to-play scheme.
Wonder how much money it would take for that file to see the light of day?
Everything the Clintons touch is tainted. Same goes for Obama for the last 7 years and for years to come.
These Panama Papers are rocking some of the countries and powers that be. It is interesting to watch.
How does one pronounce that? Like "mocker", or nearly so. Macher is a yiddish word for the guy who can assess the complex dilemma, pull all its disparate elements together, and then see to the solving and disposal of the problem.
If you saw Pulp Fiction, Wolfe was the macher.
I didn't know that. Thanks for digging.
I just dug a quick example but here. You can find more: http://www.wnd.com/2016/01/oregon-shootout-rooted-in-clinton-uranium-trade/
First off: the article makes no mention of if the Clintons and the Panamanians were involved through that foundation of his. Such a revelation could be choice ... we’ll see.
More of topic, the article fails to establish an actual Clinton connection to Sberbank (and maybe then the Kremlin) even though it clearly establishes a Podesta one.
At one point the writer wonders why the Podestas would get involved with Sberbank ... which to me is hardly a mystery given that the brothers are old time Clintonistas: a circle of friends whose ethical stances on money may be best summed up as money given to us is good.
Many people may have forgotten an incident during the Clinton Administration where it was discovered that Clinton had received campaign donations from pornographers. When challenged if he should give the money back Bill said, cryptically, something to the point that returning that money would increase the influence of other monies given. This statement flummoxed a number of commentators, including Rush, because it seemed as if Clinton was talking about other monies given TO HIM rather than other monies given to HIS OPPONENTS.
Yet realizing that the other monies were those given to opponents cleared up the statement. If he returned money given to him, from any source whatsoever, then the balance of how much money he has vs his opponents have will shift by that much. In this way Clinton built on the ethical framework that justifies all donations, no matter their source.
So that being the case, why WOULD anyone expect an old time Clintonista to have discovered better ethical standards than that?
I would not be surprised to find out that the Podestras are actively funneling monies to any number of Democrats or so-called “moderate” Republicans, mind you.
I would not even be surprised if Hillary is knowingly getting Russian support, it’s just that the article fails to establish this.
One other comment the article made was about Sberbank’s dealings funneling money to questionable investments ... but can we really throw stones at that? *cough* Soylendra *cough*
Interesting article you linked to here, smittie
Noticed a couple new xlintonistas rademaker & adams have now moved from asst secretaries of state to the podesta branch of the xlinton regime.
Will be following the money in the panama papers to the cayman accounts/client the podestas serve.
My bet is hildabeast’s vig while sec of state will make the rake off from the WH bed & breakfast look like small taters.
Trump talked about this several months ago. He said he knew who these people are and, "They are NOT nice people". That means to me they EXPECT pay back for their "Donations".
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.